Dick Morris today took a break from continuing his history of wildly inaccurate political predictions in order to make some wildly incoherent analysis. Discussing William Daley, Obama's pick to replace Rahm Emmanuel for White House Chief of Staff, Morris compounded his normal stupidity by appearing to not know who Daley is, yet baselessly smeared him anyway.
For reference, Daley is the son of former Chicago mayor Richard J. Daley and the brother of current Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley. He was Secretary of Commerce under President Clinton, and has worked in various banking and financial sector jobs including, most recently, an executive position with J. P. Morgan Chase. Based on that, you tell me if you think Morris knew which Daley he was talking about when he decided to attack Obama's pick for Chief of Staff.
Right out of the gate, Morris boldly declared that Daley's nomination is "going to hurt [Obama]. Because [Daley] is used to running a city. He's used to executive experience, being a mayor." Again, William Daley was never mayor. Strike one, Morris.
Second attack: Daley has no "legislative experience and the main job of the chief of staff right now, these days, is to fight with the Congress and to lead the president's forces in that battle. And Daley does not know Washington. He's never been in Congress to my knowledge. I don't think he has." Clearly if Morris had known that Daley had been Secretary of Commerce for three and a half years--and not mayor of Chicago--it would pretty much kill the idea that he "does not know Washington." Also, why doesn't Morris know if Daley's been in Congress? Couldn't he be bothered to Google Daley before showing up on national television to trash him? Obviously not.
Third attack: "Listen, come on, [Obama's] now picked two guys from the state that has one of the most corrupt politics in the United States. So how long is he going to skate by and be lucky not to be hit with scandal? Emmanuel at least was very wealthy and therefore, most likely one thinks fairly honest financially. Daley comes from a checkered past, shall we say?" No part of this makes any sense. Again, Daley, himself, isn't a Chicago politician and has spent the bulk of his career working in the financial sector. His pick as Chief of Staff won praise from the conservative Chamber of Commerce and numerous Republicans. So this idea that he's part of a "corrupt" Chicago machine is simply the ultimate guilt-by-association smear.
Morris' claim "Emmanuel was wealthy so he's fairly honest financially" also doesn't make sense, as I'd imagine that being the Midwest Chariman of JP Morgan Chase wouldn't exactly leave you in the poorhouse. So by Morris' logic, Daley must be "fairly honest" as well. Does that mean Morris unintentionally debunked his entire, baseless attack?
Undaunted, Morris continued, claiming that Daley has a "checkered past, shall we say." Morris couldn't be bothered to provide any evidence of this claim, of course. Not a single example.
How could Morris appear on national television without knowing anything about what is pretty significant political news? Did he really never think that might be a bad idea? One thing is clear: Fox News doesn't care. Morris has a well-documented tendency to be wrong on almost everything yet given his continued employment, this doesn't appear to be disqualifying criteria for a prominent position on Fox News.